tv [untitled] March 1, 2012 2:00pm-2:30pm PST
sections. we would have phase one, two, and three in separate legislation. >>just to cluster, the cluster that comes to mind to me would be looking at the sheet justin passed out. lcc use with nonconforming uses and the two sud's. commissioner migueloore: parkin- >> i am suggesting the cluster of those six items be one phase and the other the second phase. commissioner moore: could you repeat that? >> just looking at it just now. automotive uses, accessory, and the lcc, the nonconforming
uses, and the washington- broadway sud and [inaudible] >> that is good. commissioner moore: that couldn't be discussed as district issues. perhaps when you see how much work is you can pull that one out again. the location specific areas, you get more public push back and questions also. i am saying without knowing what is entailed, who might come out to speak to it, that is a possibility. i also wanted to ask president fong, mr. star did a good job in summarizing this but it came very late. we did get it with our package
that we can spend the correct time and preparing. it was quite late last night. i appreciate that you are sorting out and doing it similar to what you did today. an excellent way of doing it. >> i appreciate that. much more time. commissioner moore: that is what we would be expecting. commissioner sugaya: looking at the next item which also deals with a washington-broadway sud, what it makes sense to break those out and include those in the discussion are not? -- or not? i would suggest that unless you are ready to vote on those today or if you want a presentation on those today that
you continue. >> the city attorney is informing me your recommendation -- the question encompasses 4b and that cannot be discussed at this point. it is about 4b. we have to talk to that when we get to 4b. ok. who was the second arab motion? >> i was. -- who was the seconder of the motion. >> i was. >> we may be able to unload some of that from the past. would that be advisable? >> i would recommend you keep the staff report from february. >> february, ok.
>> and the 351 pages. >> of course. thank you. >> call the question. >> i will try this. my understanding the motion is for approval of the adoption of staff recommended modification based on the five areas you covered today which are clerical modification, bike parking, signs, and canopies. that modification is the maker of the motion does not want to include cosmetic change as something to contribute to the elimination of signs. and -- i am sorry. time of enforcement. >> on the temporary signs such
as something for america's cup on the embarcadero,. of expiration, -- the embarcadero, period of expiration. >> on the motion as it has been clarified. commissioner borden, aye. commissioner aye, aye. commissioner moore, aye, commissioner wu, aye. commissionerwe will come back ie three. the next is automotive uses and nonconforming uses, washington- broadway sud's. >> if i am making you do it at a
date specific. >> i did not hear a bit specific. >> perhaps night -- march 29 and april 5. that would be april 5. the phase two would come back on april 5. >> interface 3. >> and face three -- phase three. the divided portions would come a week after that? april 12. >> phase three would come back on april 12. >> does this require an extension from the board? >> you have one more week so, yes. >> ok. if there are and exceptions to that motion, if no one has a problem.
this item. >> we need a motion for refusal of commissioner fong. commissioner moore, aye. commissioner antonini, aye. commissioner fong, aye. commissioner borden, aye. >> i understand you want to move the portion of the embarcadero which is a map change and that is under this item as well since you voted the previous item to change the code so that portion can move forward. and how the rest of it continue to april. -- have the rest of it continue to april. >> commissioners. commissioner moore: the only
question i would ask you to explain to us is, is it only a map changed? in a larger discussion, this happens to be the port's main street. i would prefer not to take this out separately but see it in aio get some guidance. >> again it would only prohibit general advertising signs and signs of greater than 200 square feet. in your last motion to approve to change the planning code. this motion would make the map correspond to that. >> if you are entertaining the
possibility of taking action as staff has recommended, i would recommend that you open public comment before you take that action. commissioner wu: is there any public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> is your microphone on? commissioner antonini: it sounds like this is a consistency with our first action separate from the sud considerations for hearing scheduled in april. i would move to approve subject to commissioner comments. >> i will set in that. >> is there any commission discussion? commissioner moore: i am not so comfortable with it.
it is -- i would like to rent -- understand the discussion. this is my way of thinking and doing wings. i was -- did not want to do that. -- this is my weight and thinking -- of thinking and doing things. >> i will not supported either. if we are dealing with the sud's, we are dealing with them in the future. this may be smaller consequences but it seems like if we're dealing with the sud, why not deal with it all at once? commissioner wu: commissioner borden. commissioner borden: maybe you can talk about what this map you want us to approve has on it. do we have a copy? of our old presentation.
>> it is not on the map but the description -- two documents. one is the zoning map. the other is the code. they appear -- the phoenix streets appear on the map. in the map i give you i did not give you that because it would be too complicated. it is described in that package of what street, to what street along embarcadero. it is up to you. it can be considered the next time. this is in consistency with your last action. >> you could draw a distinction between the mapping we're voting on as part of this measure, as opposed to the establishment or the -- of the sud's and why this
is consistent with what we passed earlier. >> make a distinction? >> we're trying to get some clarification. >> in the memo i give you a described -- i describegive youi described -- this is one of the items you approved. the suggestion i made was to allow that portion to go forward on the second part of the legislation which makes the map changes. you have already included it in there. until you bowed to include it on the map, the document does not get changed. >> what i am understanding is as part of our first action we did expand that street to include the broadway, the area you are speaking about. embarcadero. and so to make our action
finalized, we should approve this map change. it does not have anything to do with the legislation that will be before us in april. >> correct. >> ok. commissioner moore: i believe that for the sake of comprehensiveness, will understand all issues -- we understand all issues supporting the i97ég to make the map change which i think requires other things to be considered. i am not prepared to do that. i think i would say there is nothing lost by holding that until we discuss the issue. it does not change anything. i do not believe it needs to be done as a piecemeal action. >> we're not asking for any of the changes to be made to the map that will be discussed at a later date. we're asking that you act on the portion of the map relative to
the embarcadero stanek street bridge to have recommended approval of. it would be bifurcating, to be consistent with the last issue to take an action on the embarcadero scenic sign issue. all the other mapping issues to a later date when you will address those planning code issues. commissioner moore: i appreciate your explanation. that does not change how i feel about it. commissioner sugaya: mr. sanchez, if lenders to do correctly, -- if i understood you correctly, the motion has already been made. the motion affects what would be item no. 6 which is adding the embarcadero -- excuse me.